"Because a bipartisan law that will pass is more attractive to Democrats than a highly restrictive law that might fail and cause them to lose their constituency at the next election."
Ah, like the Assault Weapons Ban in 1994...right? They sure learned their lesson on that one, or not. Or Obamacare, for that matter. No, they are getting more brazen at steamrolling the opposition, if anything (both sides, just Republicans aren't in as good a position to do so)
"If you truly believe every Democrat wants to ban all guns and every Republican congressman wants to repeal all gun control, then this conversation isn't going to make any sense to you. But politicians are expedient people who spend half their time fundraising and trying to appear re-electable."
I truly believe that if the issue is to be finally settled, as you claim is the goal with all this strategy, it will end with either all or nothing. We existed for centuries with few if any federal controls on civilian firearms, there are other nations who existed for centuries with few if any provisions for civilian firearms. Anything in the middle is an inherently unstable situation that is progressing to one logical conclusion or the other.
"One positive aspect of passing UBCs now is that we could get something for it. (Suppressors as regular accessories, elimination of stupid rules on minimum barrel lengths, nationwide concealed carry, etc)"
Cool; let's let the anti's make the pitch with their hat in hand, for a change. Oh wait, the only reason we're entertaining breaking bread with them is because we're terrified they're about to be in charge again! Do you really think they aren't similarly aware, and salivating at the chance to go after us after ten straight years of humiliation? Why would they give us anything? When have they ever given us anything? We have compromised so many times, given so much up, even when we had a seat at the table, and all it gets us is more unassailable statute, and more bad legal precedent. The last 'good' gun law passed at the federal level was FOPA, and the machinegun ban is coming home to roost in the form of assault weapons bans affecting semi-autos at large.
There is definitely a give and take in politics, and there will be too on the gun issue. But we need to be playing for keeps, because the other side most certainly is (contrary to RX's assurances, everywhere that Democrat anti-gunners spearheading the national pushes have been given free reign, guns were effectively banned, and it is only in the last few decades after a couple big if short-lived SCOTUS wins that places like DC, Chicago, and Detroit regained even a semblance of a RKBA). That means finding areas where we can stake a claim, and reinforce it. As I suggested, more thorough controls & oversight of the kinds of data the feds can gather on us is a good area. But in the end, most of it needs to be repeals --not rewrites-- of the statutes that have piled up. We already have a dedicated amendment to the constitution 'settling' this issue once and for all, and even that nuclear option wasn't enough. Only way to settle it in the end is to so discredit the gun control movement that every last one of their measures is repealed (similar to what ultimately happened to the Prohibitionists, once the big flagship measure is defeated, the rest soon follow) and the idea of federal gun control laws are once again labeled as fringe kook policy incompatible with our system.